Clarity on PLM

What I learned as a follow up to my report on Product Data Accessibility is that there is a lot more angst about finding product data than I ever realized. I was amazed at the discussion generated by my blog post about accessing all product data regardless of how it is stored. In particular, there as a lot of PDA discussion on LinkedIn. For those that can’t access it (I was told you have to join the group) I decided to share some of what I learned from it here.

What I Learned

One of the key findings of the report was that “accessing product data and centralizing it are not absolutely linked.” That really seems to resonate with people. One person I spoke with (Skype, not in the LinkedIn thread or my comments) reiterated that point, saying that “you need control, but regardless of where you are with that you have to be able to find data.” That brings up some interesting thoughts about PDM. My report on the business value of Product Data Management highlights controlling/securing data, finding/reusing data, and sharing data as primary benefits of PDM. There is clearly overlap in finding/reusing data between PDM and PDA. My view is that PDM and PDA are complementary solutions, and the discussion seems to indicate that there is no requirement to have one in place before the other, either can help regardless of whether the other is in place. One example brought up in the LinkedIn group is how useful search can be after an acquisition, and not having to wait for systems to be migrated. This need (and opportunity) was echoed by others.

Time for a Maturity Model?

I have seen maturity models for PDM and PLM (among others), but given a lot of the comments and the research for the report about the need for product data accessibility I thought I would take a stab at a few levels of accessibility:

1. The Wild, Wild West – No formal accessibility strategy. From the discussions I have had, this is very common. Searching on document names and looking for things where they are “supposed to be.”
2. Basic Search – Ability to search for information in known locations based on known parameters, perhaps with some full text search thrown in.
3. Advanced Search – A formal strategy based on an index, most likely including helpful capabilities like saved and shared searches. One comment mentioned Zakta.com that offers guides for searches, although I am not familiar with the solution (but I guess I should be). I am feeling a matrix might be applicable here, though, because there are different approaches that include text, attributes, metadata, or shape (like what ShapeSpace or Siemens PLM’s Geolus solution offers), and I am sure others.
4. Access and Aggregate – Accessing disparate data and pulling it together to get a more full view of the product. Perhaps this is two levels, depending on the intelligence behind the aggregation, or maybe there is another matrix forming here. For example, using semantics to intelligently discover relationships like Inforbix does is more powerful than simply aggregating on part numbers.
5. Search Based Applications – Accessing, aggregating, and acting on product data. This would include Search based applications (SBA) such as Dassault Systemes’ Exelead (focused more broadly products) and Inforbix xApps. Perhaps another capability that belongs here (or another level?) is the ability to develop composite applications that can both access and update underlying data? Or maybe that belongs somewhere else, not sure.

Implications for Manufacturers

I am not suggesting that the above is ready for prime time, it needs some work in order to really be robust. And no maturity model should really include a level called “the Wild, Wild West.” But I hope it serves as a way to get people thinking about the different ways companies can access, aggregate, and use their product data to drive more business value.

I don’t see this as a replacement for centralizing and controlling product data. One commenter even mentioned it would be nice to link data to workflows. That starts to sound like  PDM and PLM to me. In fact, I think we will see incorporation of these capabilities in PLM, as well as offer independently. The value is clear, and there are options to pursue, so it’s time to take a look.

So those are some thoughts on product data accessibility, I hope you found it interesting. Who knew? I didn’t, if you did let us know about it. Another good resource on the topic is the Inforbix product data space blog. For full disclosure, Inforbix is a client, but they didn’t ask for this mention and I bring it up because Oleg has really taken the time to explore this issue and communicate about it. Let me know what you think.

A quick peek into some research on … the importance of accessing all product-related information, whether it is stored in a formal system such as Product Data Management (PDM) or not. The report, Issue in Focus: Product Data Accessibility: Getting Value from All of your Product Data, explains the importance for manufacturers to readily retrieve product data and points out that there are emerging technologies that can help.

The Research Findings

I have reported on the importance of product data many times, including Tech-Clarity’s The Business Value of Product Data Management: Achieving Rapid and Extendible Benefits and Managing Engineering Data – The Role of Product Data Management in Improving Engineering Efficiency. In the PDM report, I talked about three fundamentals of PDM:

• Control and secure product-related data
• Improve the ability to quickly find and reuse information
• Share product knowledge with other departments

But the report discusses the reality that, as the report says, “Many companies don’t have centralized product data, and even those that do typically have a lot of product-related data spread out across the business that isn’t centralized.” Manufactures have to live with the following realities:

• Not all companies have been able to control their product data in this way (due to software or implementations costs or other factors like acquisitions that leave companies with multiple processes and solutions)
• Many companies are handling the control of their data manually
• Most companies have product data that will probably never be under control of a formal system, including documents and spreadsheets that reference parts and products
• Most manufacturers have important information in their ERP, SCM, CRM, and other systems that can be valuable

The report also makes an important conclusion that “accessing product data and centralizing it are not absolutely linked, and there are emerging technologies that help engineers access data without having to consolidate it in a central location.” These new technologies can help engineers stop wasting time looking for data. In addition, they can intelligently aggregate (‘mash up”) if you will, data from different sources to see the big picture and make better decisions.

Implications for Manufacturers

I am not coming out against PDM. PDM offers valuable functions that allow companies to control their product data. Capabilities like revision control, check-in/out, and approval cycles are important. For companies that need to manage complex relationships between files, including 3D CAD assemblies, there are important features in PDM. But if you find yourself facing one or more of the realities above (I would bet that includes 90% or more manufacturers) then you have to live in your current reality. And realize that your reality may change in the blink of an acquisition.

Manufacturers should check out the new class of technologies that is evolving aimed at allowing companies to quickly assemble their information in much the same way that a search engine like Google. These technologies are absolutely worth a look. Should we call the “PDA” for Product Data Accessibility? Or product data search? But both seem to fall short when you consider what they can do to not only find but assemble and act on the data. Time will tell. Will they replace the need for PDM? Will they augment an existing PDM implementation (or multiple implementations, as some companies have)? It really depends on your business, but I envision it serving all of these needs. But the simple truth is that companies need to access all of their product data and put it into context in order to make good decisions. A product data accessibility approach allows them to access their information quickly, regardless of the reality they live in.

So that was a quick peek into some recent research on product data accessibility, I hope you found it interesting. Does the research reflect your experiences? Do you see it differently? Let us know what it looks like from your perspective. Please feel free to review more free research and white papers about product data and other enterprise software for manufacturers from Tech-Clarity.

What I learned this week … came from watching the Did You Know 3.0 Video and asking myself what it means to the world of manufacturing and product lifecycle management (PLM). The answer? Quite a lot. If you haven’t seen the video, it is worth 5 minutes of your time to give you an entertaining and informative look into the times we live in. The part that really caught me was that we live in “exponential times.” Things are changing rapidly in our personal and professional lives, and manufacturers need to consider the ways the world is changing in order to be relevant with the right products (and the right processes) to capitalize on the future.

Note: Thanks to Randall Newton at CADCAMNet for posting the link. I have seen this before, but his post was what made me really think about it.

Did You Know?

The video, if you haven’t seen it before, tries to put the world in perspective through facts and pictograms. I have seen these before, and they are always thought-provoking.  According to the source, this was put together by Karl Fisch and modified by Scott McLeod. Some of the key takeaways for me are:

• MySpace has 200 million subscribers, if it were a country it would be 5th largest in the world
• A week’s worth of the New York Times holds as much information as an average person would come across in a lifetime in the 18th century
• The amount of technical information doubles every two years
• The number of text messages sent/received in a day exceeds the population of the planet
• The time it took for a product/technology to reach a market audience of 50 million:
  • Radio – 38 years
  • Television – 13 years
  • iPod – 3 years
  • FaceBook – 2 years

Further, there are some fascinating facts about the increased capabilities of computing technologies.

What Does it All Mean (for Manufacturing and PLM)?

The video ends with a question – “What Does it All Mean?” – without providing an answer. The answer, of course, depends on who you are and how the changes impact your world.  When I watched this, I tried to take the perspective of what impacts this will have on product innovation, product development, engineering, and manufacturing. Further, I tried to consider how this will impact the software solutions that help support product lifecycle management. There are challenges and opportunities on the way. Here are my thoughts:

• Social networking is exploding – this offers a tremendous benefit for manufacturers that want to use social computing in PLM to improve collaboration and dramatically change the way they interact with their markets and customers.
• Knowledge is exploding – manufacturers have a tremendous challenge to manage their own information and intellectual property, let alone be able to access and leverage the information available across the globe. Search, Knowledge Management (KM), and Business Intelligence (BI) will become bigger requirements inside PLM and to drive product innovation by tapping into global knowledge sources. Social computing will also play a role here, as manufacturers try to discover the people with the right knowledge in addition to knowledge.
• Time to market is evaporating – the time lag between a technical advance and the commercialization is disappearing. This makes new product development (NPD) critical, but also further supports the need to rapidly discover and take advantage of knowledge anywhere in the world. It also means that manufacturers will have to get their products right the first time, or someone else will take the market away from them.
• Computing power is exploding – the exponential growth of computing power will play a large role in what PLM vendors are able to do with their software, opening up new opportunities including continued expansion of 3D, animation, and simulation in the way we interact with products.

So that is some insight on the times we live in and my thoughts on the implications for manufacturing and PLM, I hope you found it interesting. Who knew? I didn’t. And I am sure I missed something, feel free to add. And for those that watched the video, please pass along any ideas on how to get that music out of my head!

Please feel free to review related perspectives, free research and white papers about PLM and other enterprise software for manufacturers from Tech-Clarity.

I had the chance to talk with … Drew Sherlock of ShapeSpace a while back, and then had the opportunity to meet him in person at COFES. We talked about the importance of search in in engineering and product development, and how searching by shape is adding another way for companies to find (and hopefully easily reuse) parts. Search has received a lot of attention over the years – particularly as companies are trying to consolidate search across multiple data sources using enterprise search. In design and engineering, search has evolved to include parametric search (search based on attributes, typically on metadata that describes a part) to complement more basic text search techniques. But can a company have too many ways to search? Given the potential benefits of reuse – and the tendency for most people to reinvent the wheel when they can’t readily find a good starting point – I will say “not yet.” Maybe if we find the killer search technique it will change everything, but for now having another way to find relevant parts is a big step forward.

What do they Offer?
What ShapeSpace offers is the promise of a new way to find parts. Finding parts quickly improves efficiency, helps companies reduce duplicate parts (by finding and eliminating existing duplicates), and helps companies reuse existing parts instead of creating new ones (reducing the number of new duplicate, or near-duplicate parts being created). Of these, reuse is one benefit that can be broken down into many valuable improvements:

• Reusing a part saves the time to engineer a new one, speeding time to market
• Reuse eliminates the effort required to design the new part, saving cost
• Reducing duplicates (old and new) helps reduce purchase costs and inventory carrying costs
• Reuse of a part also means reuse of the analysis, validation, testing, and compliance effort for that part

The way they do this is by reviewing CAD files (currently working with Solid Edge) and creating an index of shapes with their product, PartBrowser. Then, people can search (currently on the desktop) via text, sketch, or sample parts. The most intriguing part to me is the way they display the results. The software uses a 3D context to show search results (see graphic) with different panes, or sheets, of 3D thumbnails of parts. These sheets are transparent and grouped logically, and the user can rotate and move them to get a better fit to what they are looking for. This allows them to browse based on visual clues, narrowing in on the shape they are looking for. In this way it is more of a browsing approach, showing everything similar to a shape selected, and bringing the closest matches up in front, plus other suggestions with similarities. A very compelling idea, and a very interesting concept for the interface. For a more in depth look at the 3D context (with the navigation tree and related text) see this sample PartBrowser screenshot.

3D Browsing of Shape Search Results

Who do they Work With?
They are in beta, working with some early customers. One customer in food industry, using it for the designs in their plant and processing facilities, another in the furniture industry using it for dies. The potential industries include any company that uses 3D part designs, which doesn’t limit them very much. The potential for this to be a very generalized tool in the PLM toolkit is significant.

How does this Fit into the Ecosystem?
ShapeSpace is not the first company to offer shape-based search, and certainly not the largest. This is an area that is ripe for innovation, however, and specialty vendors like ShapeSpace are more likely to push the limits than their larger competitors. ShapeSpace is in very early stages of their solution, but will also be very interesting to keep an eye on as their product and company matures.

So that’s what I hear from them, I hope you found it useful. What do you think? What else should I have asked them?